Basis of bearing laws

We're still allowed to use interior angles on a survey. Hardly anyone ever does that, but it's within the law to do so. I have seen it in urban areas occasionally. I just had one in Camden, NJ like that the other day where the deed and prior survey that I tracked down only had interior angles specified. Maybe the guy was afraid to set up a GPS receiver on site;-)

In central Alabama, angles on surveys and deeds have been used by almost everyone for many years. Usually they are deflections but occasionally are interior angles. Most surveyors now use bearings because they are easier to plot and describe. 🙂 Alabama SOP has a basis of bearings requirement if bearings are used.

We have 4 options if we choose to use bearings rather than angles: Astronomic/Geodetic, Reference to Recorded Survey, Grid, or Assumed. I prefer to use geodetic on every line like the BLM does, but if I have to "flat earth" it, I specify which line is true and that the others were calc'd using plane geometry methods. The PLSS system is fun. Congress shouldn't be allowed anywhere near this, but that's a different topic. I say don't mess with fixing what isn't broken.

So, Roadburner, you do it the same as the BLM?

Ok, I think you are the first person I have known about that did this.

N

> So, Roadburner, you do it the same as the BLM?
>
> Ok, I think you are the first person I have known about that did this.
>
> N

I usually use grid.

Idaho does require us to designate a line between two monuments as the Basis of Bearing. They do not require us to relate it to a particular record or system.
As for having the BLM switch to SPC, I don't see how it would work. They have a different mission on a different scale. All individual grid systems have established relationships with Geodetic positions, but crossing systems and zones under the control of 50 different States would be an unnecessary burden. The Public Land Survey System is exactly that, a System. As my understanding of the history of the PLSS expands, so does my appreciation for the depth of genius involved in developing it. I know some will shake their heads at that statement, but that's quite alright (and likely another thread).
I personally do most of my local surveys on custom projections, nearly all of which mimic Grid Bearings. It is very easy to repeat and relate to multiple records with minimum control and or metadata. I select the line to use based on the manner in which Title was established or has been maintained.
TYL, Tom

How much trouble would it be to get the BLM to go to State Plane Coords? Would you support that?

Should Congress update the BLM's use of "True Meridian" for each line?

NO!

> How much trouble would it be to get the BLM to go to State Plane Coords? Would you support that?
>
> Should Congress update the BLM's use of "True Meridian" for each line?
>
>
>
> NO!

:good:

> Idaho does require us to designate a line between two monuments as the Basis of Bearing. They do not require us to relate it to a particular record or system.
> As for having the BLM switch to SPC, I don't see how it would work. They have a different mission on a different scale. All individual grid systems have established relationships with Geodetic positions, but crossing systems and zones under the control of 50 different States would be an unnecessary burden. The Public Land Survey System is exactly that, a System. As my understanding of the history of the PLSS expands, so does my appreciation for the depth of genius involved in developing it. I know some will shake their heads at that statement, but that's quite alright (and likely another thread).
> I personally do most of my local surveys on custom projections, nearly all of which mimic Grid Bearings. It is very easy to repeat and relate to multiple records with minimum control and or metadata. I select the line to use based on the manner in which Title was established or has been maintained.
> TYL, Tom

:good:

We are required to show BOB, but have plenty of options. It can not be assumed. We can use magnetic, SPC, true north or record north (from any plat on record). We (at the company I work for) type alongside the north arrow "Magnetic North 2014" or "Record North 6-20-1976" or whatever date is on the plat we rotated to.

Personally, I prefer magnetic, but if I am retracing a lot in a subdivision done by another surveyor I will use their North.

I am not in PLSS world, so I will not weigh in on your last question. 🙂

Not in your union but here in Tasmania, every survey submitted to the Titles Office since 2005 has had to be on grid bearings and coordinated. We are what you call a recording state so every time a corner gets marked then notes have to be submitted.

It makes life so very easy to be able to load up a survey and step out and find monuments, etc. The standards of boundary definition were not changed at all but having things coordinated is a massive plus.

People did have a bit of a complain initially about the time needed to coordinate but now most jobs having something coordinated will save more time than was ever needed to expend to coordinate initially.

I guess I am curious... is there even any software to WORK in true bearings, for a whole survey, or is that not a last step, done by the BLM?

I mean, I think they work in PLANE trig, until the end, then convert the bearings to be referenced to "True Meridian". Am I correct?

N